coker bi-monthly unit review coker current issues figures –coker furnace operations economics...

Coker Bi-Monthly Unit Review

• Coker Current Issues• Figures

– Coker Furnace Operations Economics

– Coker Furnace Forward Plan

– Coker Furnace Tube Temperatures

– Coker Furnace Temperatures vs Annual Throughput

– Pitch Cut Point

– Coke Drum Vapor Line Pressure Drop

By S.M. Haik, Mar. 2000

Current Coker Issues• H-Oil Bottoms Test Run Report

• Adjust Coker Furnace Operation to Maximize Feed Rate

• Coker Furnace Forward Plan

• Furnace Pass Trip Delays

• Fully Automated Quench

• Coker Vapor Line Quench, WTC Recommendation

• Testing Control of LGO EP with Circulating Reflux Draw

• Testing HGO / Blowdown Circulation

• Install Feed Nozzles into Main Fractionator, Original Not In Place

• Performance Testing Coker WGC, WTC


Coker Annual Throughput in BPD, Considering Capacity Loss due to Decokes

5800

6000

6200

6400

6600

6800

7000

7200

7400

7600

7800

17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

BPD Fresh Feed to Coker

To

tal B

BL

S C

oker

Ch

arg

e A

nn

ually, M

MB

BL

/Yr

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Days B

etw

een

Fu

rnace R

un

s

Coker Total Calendar Year BPD Throughput(Fresh Feed - Blending for Decokes)

Below 18 MBPD Fresh FeedRates Unchanged by Decokes

Run Between Decokes


Improve F-51

Coker Furnace

Reliability

1. Collect Dec 15 – Jan 21 Lab Data

2. Test Current Feed Quality – Jack V

3. Test Recent Poor Quality Feed for Benchmarking – Jack V

Is ROI of Prelim Project Eng <= 2 years

Lost Coker Capacity from Pit Stop to T/A = ?6 Months of Prelim Project EngineeringMUST DECIDE BY APRIL 15, 2000

Otherwise, will not make Pit StopDoes the Jack V Lab Tests Predict Fouling

Tendency?

Determine Source of Foulant

F-51 Reliability Improved

N

N

Y

N

Y

N

Is the Current Coker Furnace Feed

Contaminated?

Does F-51 Show any signs of a short run, esp. roof tube?

1. Start Project Engineering Solution

2. Determine Source of Fouling

August 2000 and Root Cause has eliminated

problem

Start Project Engineering that meets 2 yr payout and Implement @ 2003 Turn Around

Purchase Equipment that meets 2 yr payout and Implement @ 2001 Pit Stop

Performance Test F-51. Go to Maximum Feed Rate until April 15,

2000

Can Foulant Source

Be Eliminated?N

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

Coker FurnaceTentative Plan



Coker Furnace Tube Skin TemperaturesApril '97 to Present

900

950

1000

1050

1100

1150

1200

Apr-9

7

May-9

7

Jun-9

7

Jul-9

7

Sep-9

7

Oct-9

7

Nov-9

7

Jan-9

8

Feb-9

8

Mar-9

8

May-9

8

Jun-9

8

Jul-9

8

Sep-9

8

Oct-9

8

Nov-9

8

Jan-9

9

Feb-9

9

Mar-9

9

May-9

9

Jun-9

9

Jul-9

9

Aug-9

9

Oct-9

9

Nov-9

9

Dec-9

9

Feb-0

0

Mar-0

0°F

Pass 1 DEGF Pass 2 DEGF Pass 3 DEGF Pass 4 DEGF Pass 5 DEGF Pass 6 DEGF

F-51 Max Tubeskin

F-125 Max Tubeskin

Optimum Coker Furnace Tube Life Comparisons 9 Vs. 3 Month Runs Between Decokes

-$100,000

$0

$100,000

$200,000

$300,000

$400,000

$500,000

$600,000

$700,000

0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0 14.0 16.0 18.0 20.0 22.0 24.0 26.0 28.0 30.0

Years Between Furnace Tube Replacement

An

nu

alize

d V

alu

e t

o t

he

Allia

nc

e, $

/ye

ar

0.6°F/Day Fouling Rate Optimizesto 1205° Max Tube Temperature

1.8°F/Dy Fouling Rate Optimizesto 1230° Max Tube Temperature



VF Pitch Cut Point Correlation, °F

880

900

920

940

960

980

1000

1020

Apr-98 Jun-98 Sep-98 Nov-98 Jan-99 Mar-99 Jun-99 Aug-99 Oct-99 Jan-00 Mar-00

Pit

ch

Cu

t P

oin

t, °

F


Pressure Drop Frm Coke Drum To Main Frac Normalized for Flow, March 1998 to Present

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Mar-98 May-98 Jul-98 Sep-98 Nov-98 Jan-99 Mar-99 May-99 Jul-99 Sep-99 Nov-99 Jan-00 Mar-00

No

rma

lize

d D

P, P

SI

Quench Flow vs DP (Coke Drum to Main Frac)Needed to Maintain 5 Vol% of Fresh Feed Liquid in Vapor Line

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

2000

2200

2400

2600

2800

3000

3200

3400

3600

3800

4000

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40

DP (Active Coke Drum - Main Frac)

Qu

en

ch

Flo

w,

BP

D

14.5 MBPD Feed

21.5 MBPD Feed

28.5 MBPD Feed

By S.M. Haik, Nov. ‘99

Current NHT Issues• PIF NHT Feed Compositor

• Monitoring Silicon to NHT - Some Spikes

• NHT Water Wash, CCD, and E-759 Economic Study Set for December 1999

• Safeguarding

• Coker Gasoline Feed Filter Installed



NHT PHT and Main Reactor DP'sFeb 95 to Present

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

Fe

b-9

5

Ma

y-95

Jul-9

5

Oct-9

5

De

c-95

Ma

r-96

Ma

y-96

Jul-9

6

Oct-9

6

De

c-96

Ma

r-97

Ma

y-97

Au

g-9

7

Oct-9

7

Jan

-98

Ma

r-98

Jun

-98

Au

g-9

8

No

v-98

Jan

-99

Ma

r-99

Jun

-99

Au

g-9

9

PS

I

Main Rxt DP PSID PHT DP PSID


Coke Drum Vapor Line Flow Compensated DP

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

30-Apr 15-May 30-May 14-Jun 29-Jun 14-Jul 29-Jul 13-Aug 28-Aug 12-Sep

Flo

w C

om

pe

ns

ate

d D

P, p

si

Coker Fresh Feed RatePitch & CSO

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

1-Jun 1-Jul 1-Aug 31-Aug 1-Oct 31-Oct 1-Dec 31-Dec 31-Jan 1-Mar 1-Apr 1-May

Co

ke

r F

res

h F

ee

d, M

BP

D

F-51 Roof Tube Skin Temperatures

800

850

900

950

1000

1050

21-Mar 26-Mar 31-Mar 5-Apr 10-Apr 15-Apr 20-Apr 25-Apr 30-Apr 5-May 10-May 15-May

°F

F-51 PASS 1 TUBESKIN TEMP. (TOP) DEGF F-51 PASS 2 TUBESKIN TEMP. (TOP) DEGF

F-51 PASS 3 TUBESKIN TEMP. (TOP) DEGF F-51 PASS 4 TUBESKIN TEMP. (TOP) DEGF

Coke Drum Vapor Line Flow Compensated DPAfter Bypass

y = 0.5627x - 20370

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

22-May 23-May 24-May 25-May 26-May 27-May 28-May 29-May 30-May 31-May 01-Jun 02-Jun

Flo

w C

om

pe

ns

ate

d D

P, p

si


Silicon in Coker Gasoline, PV-9173/10/99 - 3/11/99

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

4.5

5

5.5

6

6.5

7

7.5

8

8.5

9

5:00 PM 6:00 PM 7:00 PM 8:00 PM 9:00 PM 10:00 PM 11:00 PM 12:00 AM 1:00 AM

ug

/ml S

ilic

on

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

GP

M o

f A

nti

foa

m


Silicon in Coker Gasoline, PV-9184/30/99 - 5/1/99

0

1.5

3

4.5

6

7.5

9

10.5

12

11:00PM

12:00AM

1:00 AM 2:00 AM 3:00 AM 4:00 AM 5:00 AM 6:00 AM 7:00 AM 8:00 AM

ug

/ml S

ilic

on

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

GP

M o

f A

nti

foa

m


NORCO Coker Data - Houston 6 (CSO)Product bpd Wt% Total LV% Delta BPD Jan-99 Dec-98

Description 1.00 (T/hr) (T/d) $/bbl Total $ $/bbl Total $

C4 4.1% 7.0% 0.07 $9.64 $0.67 $10.86 $0.75Naphtha 8.9% 12.1% 0.12 $10.67 $1.29 $13.09 $1.58LGO 20.8% 23.8% 0.24 $12.02 $2.86 $14.54 $3.47HGO 32.4% 33.7% 0.34 $10.36 $3.50 $11.60 $3.91

Coke (T/hr) 33.6% 0.0 0.063 $86.90 $5.49 $79.00 $4.99

99.80% $/bbl $13.80 $14.70

Houston 6 => $/bbl $7.80 $8.33

Delta $/bbl $6.00 $6.37

Value of Increasing Houston 6 Rate to the Coker


Tray-1 OverflowTru-Tec Scan Indicates 14-16 inches

0

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

14000

9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

Tray Liquid Height (in)

Ov

erf

low

(b

/d)


Houston 6 Feed to CokerJune 98 to Present

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

4.5

5

14-Jun 9-Jul 3-Aug 28-Aug 22-Sep 17-Oct 11-Nov 6-Dec 31-Dec 25-Jan 19-Feb 16-Mar

Ho

us

ton

6 t

o C

ok

er, M

BP

D



Coker Light Product Yield vs Drum Inlet Temperature

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

55

60

10/7

10/17

10/27

11/6

11/16

11/26

12/6

12/16

12/26

1/5

1/15

1/25

2/4

2/14

2/24

3/6

3/16

Lig

ht

Pro

du

ct Y

ield

, L

V%

900

905

910

915

920

925

930

935

940

Dru

m In

let T

emp

, °F

Coker Light Prod Yield

Drum Inlet Temp

Annulized Value / Cost Diagram of Running to Higher TMT's on F-51

$(100,000)

$-

$100,000

$200,000

$300,000

$400,000

$500,000

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30

Years Until Next F-51 Tube Replacement

Incr

emen

tal A

nn

ual

Do

llars

Annual Cost to Re-Tube F-51 Value of Decreasing Decoke Frequency Total Annualized Inc. Value

By S.M. Haik, December ‘98

December 98 Houston 6 Flow vs Coke Vanadium,High Houston 6 Flow Lowered the Vanadium in Coke

0

25

50

75

100

125

150

175

200

225

250

1-Dec 4-Dec 7-Dec 10-Dec 13-Dec 16-Dec 19-Dec 22-Dec 25-Dec 28-Dec 31-Dec

pp

m V

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

4.5

5

Ho

ust

on

6 F

low

, MB

PD

Vanadium, ppm

Houston 6 Flow, MBPD


Sodium in Coker Feeds 5/96 to Present

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

120

130

140

150

160

170

180

Ma

y-96

Jun-9

6

Aug

-96

Oct-9

6

No

v-96

Ja

n-9

7

Ma

r-97

Ap

r-97

Jun-9

7

Aug

-97

Se

p-9

7

No

v-97

De

c-9

7

Fe

b-9

8

Ap

r-98

Ma

y-98

Jul-9

8

Se

p-9

8

Oct-9

8

De

c-9

8

Fe

b-9

9N

a, p

pm

Pitch Na PPM Coker Frac Bottoms Na PPM Pitch Na PPM DU-5 Residue Na PPM Houston 6 Na PPM

Industry Best Practice, 20 ppm Max Na


Coker Feed Rate, bpd 26,000 Average Value X 60%Coke Drum Pressure Inc, psi 11 $/Day $5,036

$/yr. $1,712,198

NORCO Coker DataProduct Delta wt% Wt% Total LV% Delta BPD Jan-99 Dec-98Description / psi in Drum (T/hr) (T/d) $/bbl Total $ Dec-98 Total $C4 0 0 0.00% 0 $9.64 $0 $10.86 $0Naphtha 0.16% 1.81% 2.45% 636 $10.67 $6,787 $13.09 $8,326LGO 0.34% 3.71% 4.26% 1106 $12.02 $13,299 $14.54 $16,087HGO -0.98% -10.83% -11.28% -2932 $10.36 ($30,372) $11.60 ($34,007)Coke (T/hr) 0.48% 5.31% 10.0 239 $86.90 $20,768 $79.00 $18,880

$/Day $10,482 $9,286$/yr $3,563,816 $3,157,221

Data from Delayed Coking Seminar, by Norm LiebermanProduct Delta wt% Wt% Total LV% Delta BPD Jan-99 Dec-98Description / psi in Drum (T/hr) (T/d) $/bbl Total $ Dec-98 Total $C4 0.09% 0.96% 1.63% 425 $9.64 $4,092 $10.86 $4,610Naphtha 0.16% 1.78% 2.41% 627 $10.67 $6,687 $13.09 $8,204LGO 0.18% 1.98% 2.27% 590 $12.02 $7,092 $14.54 $8,579HGO -0.59% -6.45% -6.72% -1746 $10.36 ($18,088) $11.60 ($20,252)Coke (T/hr) 0.16% 1.72% 3.2 78 $86.90 $6,747 $79.00 $6,133

$/Day $6,531 $7,274$/yr $2,220,472 $2,473,147

Value of Increased Coke Drum Pressure


coker bi-monthly unit review coker current issues figures –coker furnace operations economics...

Documents

max tubeskinsheet

max tubeskinf

benchmarking jack v

main fractionator

mbpd fresh feedrates

roi of prelim project